Looks like i was looking at the king county results.
Also, I’m a democrat but the county suing if 976 passes is a huge slap in the face of the voters who approved the initiative. This is why KC gets flak. They just impose their will.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Initiative 976
- Thread starter N8DGR8
- Start date
Looks like i was looking at the king county results.
Also, I’m a democrat but the county suing if 976 passes is a huge slap in the face of the voters who approved the initiative. This is why KC gets flak. They just impose their will.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
If they need $$$ to fund stuff just have the cojones to raise the tax on fools fuel.....
I ended up voting yes. I still support funding Sound Transit. However, I really had a problem with the new $75 fee for hybrids and the $150 fee for electric cars. Hybrids and electrics cost more than traditional ICE vehicles => the state is getting additional sales tax revenue for the hybrid and electric options that offsets any loss in gas taxes.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Be interesting to see what percentage of people voted 'yes' would have voted 'no' if not for the absurd EV fee which was scheduled to be jacked to $350.... I like to think it was the EV fee that really put it over the top. The fact a progressive state allowed such an onerous fee on EVs to pass when EV penetration is <50% is embarrassing. At some point EVs need to help pay for the roads but use road funding to help strangle ICE first.
I don’t think it was EV fee because most of them are in King county and it voted no.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
No doubt that wasn't the reason most people supported the initiative... but it could have put it over the top.
rpo
Member
I have no problem with the EV fee. It compensates for the revenue of the gas tax that we don't pay.
Well it didn’t take long for Dow Constantine to jump on overturning the will of the people.
King County to file lawsuit over passage of $30 car tabs initiative
King County to file lawsuit over passage of $30 car tabs initiative
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Until the fools fuel addicts start paying for the damage they're doing to our future they should at least have the decency to pay 100% for the roads. EVs can start helping to fund roads AFTER there's a carbon tax... until then raise the tax on fools fuel to fund roads....
andrewFW
Member
I think the best way to convey this is to have it be a separate "road maintenance" line item for all drivers. Gas and EV. Keep the gas tax in place as a sin tax, though. Also, base it on vehicle weight since that's the biggest contributor to road damage. Cars, pickup trucks, even heavy EVs, pay a few bucks a year. Commercial vehicles and semis pay thousands. Remember, they do all the harm to the roads, but we all pay to fix them. I don't care if the price of a furby goes up as a result. Use more trains!
*ducks from all the tomatoes being thrown*
I was so conflicted on this initiative. I live out in the Enumclaw / Maple Valley area, and the roads out here have seen pretty much zero expansion in capacity in the last 30 years. Yeah, they've added a lane in places to 169, i.e. the four-corners area of Maple Valley, but that does nothing to actually increase capacity north bound when there are miles of road that are still just two lanes. Highway 18 is still the same death trap it has been for decades, and there are really no other alternatives if you want to go north bound.
I think the problem most people have is that they see these high gas taxes and car tabs, and have no idea where that money goes. In my case, I see zero evidence of any of that going to help my commute in the last 30 years despite massive population growth and traffic out here, so why would I support more of it? People are obviously willing to pay for improvements, i.e. ST3. Show us what we have purchased with that money.
Likewise though, with this initiative apparently passing, I suspect we will now see an increased push for an alternative pay-by-mile type system. I see that turning into something similar to the 405 tolling lanes, with expensive outside monitoring and a questionable at best return to the tax payers.
I think the problem most people have is that they see these high gas taxes and car tabs, and have no idea where that money goes. In my case, I see zero evidence of any of that going to help my commute in the last 30 years despite massive population growth and traffic out here, so why would I support more of it? People are obviously willing to pay for improvements, i.e. ST3. Show us what we have purchased with that money.
Likewise though, with this initiative apparently passing, I suspect we will now see an increased push for an alternative pay-by-mile type system. I see that turning into something similar to the 405 tolling lanes, with expensive outside monitoring and a questionable at best return to the tax payers.
rpo
Member
If the will of the people was an initiative that was not legal to pass, then the people's will has no say.
Also, King County wants the higher tabs that we voted on years ago to fund local transportation projects. How is the will of the people of Spokane County allowed to take away funding for our local projects?
Last edited:
Headline: Big Bad Eyman harassing staffers 
<iframe width='640' height='360' src='http://sinclairstoryline.com/resour...b8f540649562ba2c4da896c1.m3u8&autostart=false' /></iframe>
<iframe width='640' height='360' src='http://sinclairstoryline.com/resour...b8f540649562ba2c4da896c1.m3u8&autostart=false' /></iframe>
Last edited:
DustWindDude
Member
I'm confused. Do the proposed changes to current RCW detailed in section 5 of this initiative mean that EVs will be charged an additional $30 fee on top of the standard $30 registration fee?
"...must require the applicant to pay a ((one hundred dollar fee in addition to any other fees and taxes required by law)) $30 fee. The ((one hundred thirty dollar)) $30 fee is due only at the time of annual registration renewal."
(Red text in the above quote is struck-through in the initiative text.)
"...must require the applicant to pay a ((one hundred dollar fee in addition to any other fees and taxes required by law)) $30 fee. The ((one hundred thirty dollar)) $30 fee is due only at the time of annual registration renewal."
(Red text in the above quote is struck-through in the initiative text.)
This initiative appears to be heading for victory, but it's apparently not going to help any of us at all. I would have liked to have seen the $150 fee for owning an EV reduced or eliminated but this initiative only affects the base fee unfortunately. Sucks that we're paying so much more money for trying to save our environment, which is exactly the opposite of how you want to encourage adoption of EVs.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Sure seems like it DOES repeal the idiotic EV fee...
The whole premise was to simplify the registration cost. The strike-through is what's being replaced. Instead of $100 + other fees it's now $30. That's it. $30.
Last edited:
Similar threads
